It has only been relatively recently that there has been a huge upsurge in news and documentary oriented video on the Internet. The ability of more common people to make videos and upload them to so-far free (even advertising free) servers has been a boom to the dissemination of, if not absolute truth, at least things that show the redeeming quality of truth seeking.
Well, without a television and without a television tuner on the computer, channel surfing has not been a distraction. At the same time though, without a TV, one is less aware of the specific details of the soul-destroying propaganda pumped out by the likes of the FOX network.
It was only within the last month that I saw my first reference anywhere to the FOX Network program entitled "24". I saw it in reference to the renewal of the show and the exorbitant salary paid to the so-called star. The headlines also pronounced the show a "hit." Having never been drawn to anything approaching FOX-minded "entertainment," I didn't delve into any of the articles. All I knew was that if it was coming out of FOX and was a "hit," it had to be spiritually unhealthy.
Well, the bad news was put in my face yesterday by the alternative news program "Democracy Now."1 The program "24" turned out to be much sicker than I had suspected. The premise of the program according to the "Democracy Now" segment is that each episode, the main character uses torture to force people to divulge a terrorist plot that had he not extracted via torture would have resulted in the deaths of many. This formula, according to "Democracy Now's" guests, has been repeated without deviation for five years: Drumbeating by demons into the minds of naÃ¯ve, gullible, and sadomasochistic-leaning viewers that torture cannot be ruled out.
The existence of this program and its sinister, depraved, antichrist plot clearly shows the deep, irreconcilable divide in the US. How could such a show exist without a moral outcry against it strong enough to dissuade anyone from supporting such a show or its sponsors?
The American public has been so numbed to the pull of satanic minds that such an outcry didn't occur. It wasn't allowed onto the mainstream media. It didn't build any momentum. It is only now becoming visible on alternative news on the Internet.
As all real Christians know, mainstream media is owned and operated by kleptomaniac, capitalist, oligarchs bent upon the total decay of the public. One need only think back to the totally reprehensible program "The Sopranos" by HBO, if memory serves. I had the great fortune never to subject myself to more than a few minutes of that program in my life, just long enough to realize that it was the glorification of abject evil. I always felt a similar distain for the "hit" movies that made up the "God Father" series. I saw plenty of war, gangster, and cowboy movies in my early youth though.
In retrospect, I realize that the profit-motive of the movie studios was not about defeating gangsterism but rather in using temptation to drive ticket sales always with mixed messages. The so-called good guys would usually prevail, but real Christianity was rarely offered as an alternative lifestyle. The real good guys were rescued by those willing to resort to ruthless and wrathful means. Well, FOX's "24" is just more of that antichrist message only with darkness even more magnified.
Thankfully, there are those who are now being moved by the Holy Spirit to expose this wicked program.
The debate about the program and torture in general often centers on the fact that it doesn't work. What is meant by doesn't work is that the so-called information given out by those subjected to torture is unreliable; hence it rarely results in saving the innocent.
We know that arm-twisting often enters a child's life very early on. All means designed to negatively force others to say particular things are torturous to some degree. Force here is contextual. The movement of the Holy Spirit is not wrathful, not negative, not toward corruption and death, not toward falsehood, the unreal. It is the appeal of truth that is harmless love, unselfish love. Wrath is temptation. "24" tempts the spirit to evil. It is evil tempting more evil. It is falsehood.
The coercion of "24" is not punishment after the fact. It is punishment where there is usually no fact. That's why torture yields falsehood. All the innocent ones tortured are corrupted by the evil spirit that takes sick pleasure in damaging others. Only the overcoming spirit can be put whole again.
In any case, coercion adds to the cumulative effect of harm. It is evil no matter how it is couched. FOX's "24" rationalizes such evil by planting the seeds that it is a necessary lesser evil to save the greater innocent. However, by contributing to evil, evil is magnified. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that since the US invasion of Baghdad in the so-called War on Terrorism, acts that have been defined as terrorism have increased six fold. Had the truth of peace and love been magnified instead, acts of terrorism would have dropped. Hence, "24" is increasing evil in the world. It is the devil tempting the viewers to do exactly the wrong thing for the sake of the liars who run the system of stealing the inheritance of others.
It is leading people astray, into greater apostasy. It is Satan planting the seeds of the tares for the great harvest. FOX is utter evil. It above all the networks is Satan's network. It is the voice from hell beckoning people into sin. No one should watch FOX. FOX should disappear, and it will. All of Rupert Murdoch's business should disappear. He's spewing putrefaction. Nothing good is allowed to come out of FOX. On FOX, good is an error and any ray of light is immediately blocked out.
As for "24," it used to be that all torturing was understood as the evil that it is. Now, rotten minds have planted seeds and more minds are developing with the rot at their cores. One thinks back to the first time that it was generally revealed that Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard professor of satanic, secular law, was arguing for legalizing torture. That came straight out of Israel that itself was forced from within to change its front. Israeli "official" position is against torture. Who's investigating the current treatment of Palestinians who are routinely kidnapped by the Israelis?
Dershowitz is mentally ill. He is spiritually possessed by the devil. That's why he is apparently lauded on FOX and by the neocons, false Zionists, as their debating champion in the campaign to paint the secular state of Israel as good and anything in opposition as bad. I've watched him "debate." He's terrible at it. He doesn't debate. He is a master at interrupting. What he spews is harmful. No one should listen to him. His positions are completely the opposition of God's desire for humanity. Dershowitz and FOX are voices against God's call for mercy and not sacrifice.
Who out there will tell the boldfaced lie that Dershowitz and FOX are not against mercy. Woe to those liars.
In both 1996 and 1997, there were no prime-time TV scenes containing torture, according to the Parents Television Council, which keeps a programming database. In 2003, there were 228 such scenes, the PTC said. The count was over 100 in both 2004 and 2005.
Human Rights First's ultimate desire is to drive home the idea that torture by Americans should never be tolerated.
"We would never try to censor anybody," Savitt [Jill Savitt, director of public programs, Human Rights First] said. "We would never tell Hollywood what to do, but we are trying to tell them what legal interrogation looks like. If it makes them pause, that's a bonus."2
"We would never tell Hollywood what to do." That's not informing Hollywood that it's spewing evil. It isn't clear and plain. Where's the message of Jesus Christ?
2 David Bauder. "Group says torture on TV influences interrogators." Associated Press. Reprinted by Times Argus. February 24, 2007. Link. (last accessed: Saturday, February 24, 2007). Return to text body.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)